Hi, On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 3:35 PM Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > This is a limitation clearly listed in the specification. Now that we > have device types,let's ensure that only FFDs can become PAN > coordinators. > > Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > net/ieee802154/nl802154.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/net/ieee802154/nl802154.c b/net/ieee802154/nl802154.c > index 638bf544f102..0c6fc3385320 100644 > --- a/net/ieee802154/nl802154.c > +++ b/net/ieee802154/nl802154.c > @@ -924,6 +924,9 @@ static int nl802154_new_interface(struct sk_buff *skb, struct genl_info *info) > return -EINVAL; > } > > + if (type == NL802154_IFTYPE_COORD && !cfg802154_is_ffd(rdev)) > + return -EINVAL; > + Look at my other mail regarding why the user needs to set this device capability, change the errno to "EOPNOTSUPP"... it would be nice to have an identically nl80211 handling like nl80211 to see which interfaces are supported. Please look how wireless is doing that and probably we should not take the standard about those "wording" too seriously. What I mean is that according to FFD or RFD it's implied on what interfaces you can create on. - Alex
